Net54baseball.com Forums

Net54baseball.com Forums (http://www.net54baseball.com/index.php)
-   Watercooler Talk- ALL sports talk (http://www.net54baseball.com/forumdisplay.php?f=25)
-   -   POLL: IN or OUT: YES or NO (http://www.net54baseball.com/showthread.php?t=249030)

clydepepper 12-18-2017 10:53 AM

POLL: IN or OUT: YES or NO
 
Just a simple YES or NO answer, please. Try not to expand on you answer. I'm just trying to gauge exactly how 'we' stand on this.

Q: Should Barry Bonds and/or Roger Clemens be Inducted into the HOF?

Big Six 12-18-2017 11:56 AM

No and no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

frankbmd 12-18-2017 12:17 PM

Who is this Cemens of whom you speak?

packs 12-18-2017 12:46 PM

Cemens in, Clemens out.

vintagetoppsguy 12-18-2017 01:29 PM

Clemens - YES
Bonds - YES

3-2-count 12-18-2017 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy (Post 1730590)
Clemens - YES
Bonds - YES

Ditto. Yes on both counts!

Michael B 12-18-2017 01:42 PM

Both NO (Out).

barrysloate 12-18-2017 05:37 PM

I said yes and yes.

Peter_Spaeth 12-18-2017 05:57 PM

Yes and yes. It's absurd that these guys -- easily in the top 5 of all time pitchers and batters, respectively -- are out and a ton of far far lesser lights are in.

barrysloate 12-18-2017 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1730678)
Yes and yes. It's absurd that these guys -- easily in the top 5 of all time pitchers and batters, respectively -- are out and a ton of far far lesser lights are in.

+1

Too many marginal players in, and Bonds and Clemens were among the greatest players ever. They've already been punished by having to wait at least ten years. Lifetime ban is too harsh.

clydepepper 12-19-2017 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frankbmd (Post 1730568)
Who is this Cemens of whom you speak?



Sarie - my tipeng has nevurr bin the besst

rats60 12-19-2017 05:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrysloate (Post 1730691)
+1

Too many marginal players in, and Bonds and Clemens were among the greatest players ever. They've already been punished by having to wait at least ten years. Lifetime ban is too harsh.

Joe Jackson has been waiting 82 years. They haven't waited long enough in my opinion.

HRBAKER 12-19-2017 06:17 PM

2 No's for me

They chose their fate

barrysloate 12-20-2017 03:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60 (Post 1731035)
Joe Jackson has been waiting 82 years. They haven't waited long enough in my opinion.

Joe Jackson's transgression was much worse. He participated in a plot to throw the World Series to gamblers. No comparison...although I would probably vote for Joe to get in.

bnorth 12-20-2017 06:02 AM

Bonds-yes
Clemens-YES

Neither cheater more than whoever your favorite player is.:D

HRBAKER 12-20-2017 06:44 AM

That's the easiest way to excuse lying and cheating, assume or assert that everyone did it.

Leon 12-20-2017 07:05 AM

no

no

vintagetoppsguy 12-20-2017 07:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HRBAKER (Post 1731152)
That's the easiest way to excuse lying and cheating, assume or assert that everyone did it.

Well, aren't you assuming that Clemens did it? As far as I know (and correct me if I'm wrong), he never failed a test.

steve B 12-20-2017 09:34 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy (Post 1731166)
Well, aren't you assuming that Clemens did it? As far as I know (and correct me if I'm wrong), he never failed a test.

Neither did Lance Armstrong.....Or at least he never failed any after the Nike people talked to the UCI people.

Peter_Spaeth 12-20-2017 09:44 AM

It's the same old tired debate, but the same people who get all sanctimonious about roids still revere guys who popped amphetamines like Aaron and Mays.

vintagetoppsguy 12-20-2017 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve B (Post 1731197)
Neither did Lance Armstrong.....Or at least he never failed any after the Nike people talked to the UCI people.

Armstrong admits it, Clemens denies it.

Leon 12-20-2017 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1731200)
It's the same old tired debate, but the same people who get all sanctimonious about roids still revere guys who popped amphetamines like Aaron and Mays.

Ruth ate hot dogs. That's my kind of guy.

conor912 12-20-2017 10:36 AM

I think it's interesting that the "yes" votes are tracking in tandem with the BBWAA.

TUM301 12-20-2017 11:49 AM

Clemens-NO, Bonds-NO

rats60 12-20-2017 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrysloate (Post 1731127)
Joe Jackson's transgression was much worse. He participated in a plot to throw the World Series to gamblers. No comparison...although I would probably vote for Joe to get in.

Strongly disagree. .375/.394/.563/.956 5 runs 1 HR 6 RBIs 0 errors in 8 games. If that is "throwing" the World Series, then Bonds "threw" 3 NLCS with his .191 BA and 3 RBIs in 20 games.

barrysloate 12-20-2017 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rats60 (Post 1731257)
Strongly disagree. .375/.394/.563/.956 5 runs 1 HR 6 RBIs 0 errors in 8 games. If that is "throwing" the World Series, then Bonds "threw" 3 NLCS with his .191 BA and 3 RBIs in 20 games.

I know Jackson had the great stats which leads one to believe he changed his mind along the way. But he did take money from the gamblers, didn't he? The first installment was split among the eight players.

Look, I don't condone cheating and personally hate it. But I also hate the incredibly mediocre players that are getting into the Hall in the place of the tainted superstars. Trammell and Morris were fine players but debatable for entry. I guess it's just my general disdain for the HOF.

botn 12-20-2017 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by barrysloate (Post 1731262)
I know Jackson had the great stats which leads one to believe he changed his mind along the way. But he did take money from the gamblers, didn't he? The first installment was split among the eight players.

Look, I don't condone cheating and personally hate it. But I also hate the incredibly mediocre players that are getting into the Hall in the place of the tainted superstars. Trammell and Morris were fine players but debatable for entry. I guess it's just my general disdain for the HOF.

Hi Barry,

Then Jackson should be punished for stealing money but let's assume he did participate in throwing the series, despite his stats saying otherwise, we are comparing a player's indiscretion over 8 games compared to those who cheated over several hundred games.

Maybe it is time for us to accept that there are really very few superstars in the game who are not cheating but that should not mean we look the other way for the guys who did cheat to become superstars. Bonds was HOF material before he used. I don't think we should be acknowledging his (or anyone else's) accomplishments knowing he broke the rules to achieve them.

Greg

packs 12-20-2017 02:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1731200)
It's the same old tired debate, but the same people who get all sanctimonious about roids still revere guys who popped amphetamines like Aaron and Mays.


I'm not understanding the greenies argument at all. You can still take the modern equivalent of greenies and play right now so long as you have a prescription. You can't take HGH or anabolic steroids at all, prescription or not. It's not an apt comparison.

HRBAKER 12-20-2017 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vintagetoppsguy (Post 1731166)
Well, aren't you assuming that Clemens did it? As far as I know (and correct me if I'm wrong), he never failed a test.

Maybe after a four year stretch in Boston where he was 40-39 with an ERA around 4 he discovered the Canadian Fountain of Youth. Just as plausible I guess.

At the end of the day these guys decided to do what they did, they were already greats. Those of us who think no didn't make them do it. They have already enjoyed all of the good things that flowed from it, the adulation, the fame, the contracts and the mockery of the record books. Now they are left to deal with the baggage.

I am certain they will get in.

Peter_Spaeth 12-20-2017 07:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs (Post 1731276)
I'm not understanding the greenies argument at all. You can still take the modern equivalent of greenies and play right now so long as you have a prescription. You can't take HGH or anabolic steroids at all, prescription or not. It's not an apt comparison.

Using amphetamines without a prescription became a federal crime in about 1970. Do you think the pile of greenies in the clubhouse until baseball banned them in 2006 (I think that's the right date) was all by prescription? So we're cool with players who committed a federal crime repeatedly, but not with players who used HGH?

clydepepper 12-20-2017 08:02 PM

Here are two weird ideas:

1.)The ONLY voting will be done by current Hall-of-Famers.


and / or


2.) Elect Bonds, Clemens, McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro, etc.,

but only INDUCT Them POSTHUMOUSLY!

Jim65 12-21-2017 06:08 AM

No on both.

packs 12-21-2017 07:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1731359)
Using amphetamines without a prescription became a federal crime in about 1970. Do you think the pile of greenies in the clubhouse until baseball banned them in 2006 (I think that's the right date) was all by prescription? So we're cool with players who committed a federal crime repeatedly, but not with players who used HGH?

Are you saying Mantle, Mays and Aaron were using greenies in the twilight of their careers post-1970? Mantle had already retired. Mays and Aaron were on their last legs.

Peter_Spaeth 12-21-2017 07:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by packs (Post 1731450)
Are you saying Mantle, Mays and Aaron were using greenies in the twilight of their careers post-1970? Mantle had already retired. Mays and Aaron were on their last legs.

You're missing the point, but in any case Aaron was very productive in the early 70s, unless you want to sneer at seasons of 47 and 40 HR and two others in the 30s. The larger point is that according to many sources, greenie use in baseball was rampant, and it's a very safe assumption that many of our heroes used them, even after they became illegal from a federal law perspective.

packs 12-21-2017 07:27 AM

Why is it safe to assume that? If Mantle used them, he used them before he wasn't allowed to. If Aaron and Mays used them, what do you point to in support of them using greenies at the end of their careers?

bravos4evr 12-22-2017 12:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1731451)
You're missing the point, but in any case Aaron was very productive in the early 70s, unless you want to sneer at seasons of 47 and 40 HR and two others in the 30s. The larger point is that according to many sources, greenie use in baseball was rampant, and it's a very safe assumption that many of our heroes used them, even after they became illegal from a federal law perspective.

no evidence that greenies improved statistics. But there is a ton of evidence that roids and HGH improved stats. No players had their best seasons after 35 until the roid era ad then suddenly 30 players did.

buymycards 12-22-2017 01:02 PM

both out
 
It isn't so much the fact that they were using steroids, but what bothers me more is that they continued to lie about it and never admitted to what they were doing. If they had just told the truth I would be more inclined to give them a yes vote.

HRBAKER 12-22-2017 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by buymycards (Post 1731930)
It isn't so much the fact that they were using steroids, but what bothers me more is that they continued to lie about it and never admitted to what they were doing. If they had just told the truth I would be more inclined to give them a yes vote.

That's their way of telling you the rules don't apply to them.

Peter_Spaeth 12-22-2017 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bravos4evr (Post 1731914)
no evidence that greenies improved statistics. But there is a ton of evidence that roids and HGH improved stats. No players had their best seasons after 35 until the roid era ad then suddenly 30 players did.

Aaron 1971 at age 37 had his highest marks for HR, OBP, SLG, OPS and OPS+.

clydepepper 12-22-2017 09:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1731999)
Aaron 1971 at age 37 had his highest marks for HR, OBP, SLG, OPS and OPS+.



For this particular instance, I really believe you can believe in the MAN more than the STATS.

Isn't that refreshing?


.

bbcard1 12-23-2017 07:16 AM

Holding nose, yes.

Their stats are beyond question and they represented an era of baseball that was a part of the story.

bravos4evr 12-23-2017 11:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1731999)
Aaron 1971 at age 37 had his highest marks for HR, OBP, SLG, OPS and OPS+.

one year is not an argument.

Lots of players have an outlying big year later in their careers and Hank had a pair of flukey high ISO years, (surrounded by years that were normal, so that seems unlikely that he only did greenies every other year?)

Plus using only one player is also fallacious. Bonds, Mac, Sosa, Palmeiro ...etc all posted long runs of their best numbers wayy late, they had double peaks.

Since baseball mandated testing did you know thee is no longer a peak at 28 like before? Now , on average so of course individuals may differ, players are peaking right away and declining by 28.

Peter_Spaeth 12-23-2017 11:14 AM

I was only responding to this:

No players had their best seasons after 35 until the roid era

I wasn't making a point about the effect of greenies.

1952boyntoncollector 12-24-2017 12:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3-2-count (Post 1730591)
Ditto. Yes on both counts!

nice card, glws..

RichardSimon 12-24-2017 03:57 PM

No and No.

brian1961 12-24-2017 06:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1730678)
Yes and yes. It's absurd that these guys -- easily in the top 5 of all time pitchers and batters, respectively -- are out and a ton of far far lesser lights are in.

The problem is how much of their light stems from the juiced bodies they gave themselves. Everyone looks to try to gain an edge; that's human nature and natural competitiveness. These two, and several other late bloomer boomers did so by illegal performance-enhancing drugs. They cheated. They cheated the integrity of the game. They do not belong in the BBHOF---ever.

Sure, there are lesser lights in the BBHOF. That fact has nothing to do with Barry Bonds or Roger Clemons. Pete Rose outshines all those lesser lights. For how little of Pete's HOF career did he actually bet on MLB? Whatever little space of time it was, it was enough for the powers that be to throw him out of the game forever. The Black Sox were involved in throwing a best of nine World Series. Just one lousy World Series.

Just---and it cost them their careers---the rest of their lives. I think that was much, much, much harsher. Barry and Roger made among the biggest boo coo during their careers. They got to keep all that. They got to play MLB as long as they wanted, pretty much.

And you've got the nerve to cry the blues, and carry their torch, and demand their enshrinement. A final thought. Not often mentioned about Barry and Roger, and all "the others", were the many, many, many young guys who thought long and hard about whether they should start taking performance-enhancing drugs to increase their own power, and increase their own chances of making it into the major leagues. For a few of those wannabes, the drugs did more for them than they'd bargained for, and they died young.

'Nuf said. ----Brian Powell

Peter_Spaeth 12-24-2017 06:17 PM

Brian how do you feel about Gaylord Perry?

Or Whitey Ford who was notorious for scuffing baseballs?

Suppose Aaron and Mays and Schmidt took greenies after taking them without a script became a federal crime? Your thoughts on that?

Another issue I have with the steroid /HGH disqualification is that it is inevitable guys who used are going to be voted in because they were more discreet, or perhaps better liked so trainers and such didn't rat them out. I would bet anything it's happened several times already if not more.

clydepepper 12-27-2017 06:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth (Post 1732562)
Brian how do you feel about Gaylord Perry?

Or Whitey Ford who was notorious for scuffing baseballs?

Suppose Aaron and Mays and Schmidt took greenies after taking them without a script became a federal crime? Your thoughts on that?

Another issue I have with the steroid /HGH disqualification is that it is inevitable guys who used are going to be voted in because they were more discreet, or perhaps better liked so trainers and such didn't rat them out. I would bet anything it's happened several times already if not more.



The highest paid players, or rather the players who are willing to spend the most on them, have the best masking agents.

Even then, 16.5 inch forearms or a size 9 head are blatantly obvious.

quinnsryche 12-27-2017 08:21 PM

Hell no on both. And never ever too.

Jacklitsch 12-27-2017 08:56 PM

In

In


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:19 AM.